Tobacco Documents Online

( SCHEDULE AND RESPONSIBILITIES

C ill y,_ The first broad audience is workplace policy makers. - Objective: - - "'-Discourage businesses, institutions, and public agencies from -- ~unfairly discriminating against employees who smoke. Strategies We will achieve this objective by: 1. Discrediting Weis and his proponents. -2. Convincingg those responsible for setting workplace policies ---that unnecessary smoking restrictions deter productivity by: . distracting.management and legal resources and . disrupting the workforce. ,.Tacti cs =Tobacco industry task forces and consultants will devise-and implement tactics ranging from advertising and articles in management journals tobriefings and presentations before key workplace policy makers.

r~. ~a . ~ .. SMOKIN3 IN TRE WORKPLACE o EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - ' o SCNEDULE AND RESPONSIBILITIES `_

OBJECTIVE II: Increase public understanding thatany workplace asoking! reatrlutlons are unneeessary and upfair. Strategy II: Demonstrate that smokers are courteoua. . Audience: Working public TACTICS RESPONSIBILITY 1983 TIMETABLE Primary Resource Mar Apr Kay Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec i 1. Develop material far smokers ln OAMPR the workplace, to proclal smokers are courteous. 2. Offer materlals in coupons Member stuffed in cartons sold companies by member companies. 3. Use Roper Reports to replicate Roper opinlon research showing Reports smokers are considerate of others. a. use findings ln briefings TI speakera OANPR with journalists and . public officlals. b. reference findings 1n all Narsteller -- national ads in this program. oes~sL94:o ___ T

C C - -III--'Ther recommended program suggests two organizational apnroaches _' - to deal with these challenges. -oThe plan describes industry/consultant task forces d-irectly involved with program implementation. .- .. - - '-. o The plan calls for a staff member to manage all facets of the issue. IV. The program obiectivesstrategies and,tactics are aimed at two broad audiences: o Workplace policy makers Financial, personnel, legal,, union, trade association, and -other professionals who recommend and/or set workplace rules. o The working public . A less sophisticated audience whose primary interest in the >- issue i~s the alleged dangers andannoyance of ambient.smoke: - They are largely in favor of separate sections but opposed to outright bans. - Qb`

C The second broad audiEnce is the workinqpublic. Obiective: 'Increase public understandingthat many workplace smoking - restrictions are unnecessary and unfair. iv Strategies To achieve this objective, we will demonstrate that: 1. Anti-smokers seek to ban smoking, not simplg restrict it. 2. Smokers are courteous, --'3tCigarette smoke in the air does not clearly cause disease in non-smokers. -4'. Unfair restrictions such as those on smoking ultimately infringe on the rights of all persons. 4L= Tobacco industry taskforces and consultants will rely - principally on massmedia approaches such as advertising, spokesmanappearances on radio and television, and carton stuffers.

OBJECTIVE I: Strategy I: Audience: ~ ; Discourage businesses, Snstltutlona and publis egei lea f:~am unf lrly dtaorininating a alnst employe a who pmoke. Discredit Weis and his proponents I. Personnel, financial, general management polieymakerap trade, oommerotal, professional assoclatlona; electedlappolnted officials -- TACTICS RFSPONSIBILI?Y Primary Resource 1. Publish Solmon article in Infoteb . Solmon Personnel Administrator. 2. Distribute Weis and Solmon Dir CR iF 1 article reprlnta to: . iF 4 OAMPR a.select major eorporatlone; . b. key legislative commltteea and government departments. 3. Promote debate between Wela/ . Solmon or Solmon presentatlons., a. contact key organizations Dir CR SF I (professlonal/bualness); b. encourage coverage of OAMPR -- debete6. i. Trede press placement O&HPR -. 5. Confront Weis at Seattle Dir CR See below . University. a. place Solmon before local 06MPR -- buslness in Seattle; b. contact Seattle business Sen VP/Ad ' TF 1 for support against wela. ' . ,. szes~9eo Mar Apr May 1983 TIMETABLg 'Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Oec i ~ ^ I

OBJECTIVE II: Increase public understanding that many workpracelemoking reetrl' otiona I ~re unnboessar4 and uhfair. I I Strategy IV: Demonstrate that unfair restrictions auoh as thoae on smoking ultAmately infringe on rights of all people. Audience: Working public TACTICS gESPO_NSIBILITY 1983 TIMETABLE - Primary Resource Mar Apr . May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1. Work concept into all national Marsteller -- ads lncluded in program. 2. Identlfy social scientist Sen VP/PR OAMPR to write article and encourage publicatlon in consumer magazines. zEss4sEo ^

OBJECTIVE II: Increase public understanding that many workplace emokingreatrletione are unnecessary and unfair. Strategy III: Demonstrate that cigarette smoke in the air does not clearly cause disease in nonsmokers. Audience: Working public TACTICS Aeeoureq Mar Apr May Marateller TF 4 OAMPA Producer Modern Talking Pictures RESPONSIBILITY Primary 1. Develop and place national ad Sen yP/PR drawing attention to sclentiflo research on this question. Distribute to journalists and public officials. • 2. Produce American version of San VP/PR "Hlrayama film" distribute by: a. Placing with Modern Talking Sen VP/PR Pictures for communlty distributlon. Providing copies for all Regional VPa b . . IlreaDirectors for preaen- tatlona to allles/potentlal ' allies; legislative staff - members. c. Develop promotional flier OAMPR -- and offer the film te local chapters of American Cancer society and American Lung Association. Publicize . responae. 3. Challenge antiamokera to TI Speakers Area debates with TI speakers before directors radio/TV audiences on ambient Support smoke issue. Place tobacco ataff . industry personnel and friends SANin llve audiences and encourage friendly telephone calls from listeners for support. 1983 TIMETABLE Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Rov Dee 4 7 7 7 IEeSG9E0

c EXECUTIVE SUM.MARY i.-.-: An-increasing number of corporations,, institutions,-and public - - agencies are imposing-unnecessary workplace-smoking _ -- - restrictions. - - -o At their most extreme, these restrictions preclude hiring smokers. More typically, they invoIveemployer-sponsored - - smoking cessation programs, segregation,, and restrictive rules. o- William.L. Weis, a Seattle University accounting professor, isatthe'forefront, with claims that smoking employees cost -more than nonsmoking employees. . .. . . . LI.---Voluntaryrestrictions by organizations pose significantly different challenges than legislatively and judiciaLLy imposed restrictions. o.There are 50 state legislatures and a few hundred ci~ties -- - where we might confront the issue, while there are hundreds . -. of thousands of workplaces where we can be effective.. o We are experienced with the legislative process but - - relatively inexperienced in thekind of corporatereLati;ons activities required for this issue. Currently, we do not have access to or credibility with workplace policy makers.